The Milner Novela... Final episode page 296

[Mazrim]

Welcome to H&V stevenjos. I hope you forget your log in details with the most supernatural urgency.

[TheSandman]

Of course.  Re-negotiating with a player less than two years into a four year deal is the way forward.  If only you had told Martin this around Christmas, when you obviously thought of it yourself, we'd be in a much better position.

MON out!

"oh look our best player this year has 2 years left on his contract, shall i offer him a new one to secure his long term future with an ambitious club orrrrrrr shall i leave it until man city come and bully us into selling?"

Eh? To be utterly honest I think the best time to have got this sorted would be at the end of the season or in this kind of window we're in now by which time Man City had already expressed an interest.

Hindsight is a marvelous thing and we're all wise after the event. I mean who would have thought Sidwell would turn out to be useless?

[stevenjos]

Welcome to H&V stevenjos. I hope you forget your log in details with the most supernatural urgency.

Hi ya. I feel really warmed by your welcome!

[Concrete John]

1.  Offering him a contract doesn't mean he'll sign it.  If Man City bid when they did he'd have known about their interest for a while before that through his agent.
2.  Only in your world is understanding that should the price get to a ridiculous level and the player wants to go then it is the best interests of the club translated to 'willing to get rid of our best player'.
3.  Are you related to gregnash?

[john e]

Welcome to H&V stevenjos. I hope you forget your log in details with the most supernatural urgency.

Leave him alone, he's alright,
 i actually agree with a lot of what he's saying, apart from he rates Milner far more highly than i do,

[john e]

1.  Offering him a contract doesn't mean he'll sign it.  If Man City bid when they did he'd have known about their interest for a while before that through his agent.
2.  Only in your world is understanding that should the price get to a ridiculous level and the player wants to go then it is the best interests of the club translated to 'willing to get rid of our best player'.
3.  Are you related to gregnash?

are you related to MON ?

[Merv]

My thoughts:

That there is a clear difference between being a 'selling club' - which to my mind is actively deploying a policy of developing players and then selling them at a higher price, before replacing them with cheaper versions, developing them and getting into the same cycle - and accepting a hugely inflated fee for a player. No other club in the world would pay £20m for James Milner at this time, let alone contemplate £25m plus.

If you start re-negotiating contracts with more than half the current term to go, you've got to expect half the first team squad to start knocking on the manager's door, demanding the same. Milner's a good player who had a good season but I don't think he did enough to warrant a hugely improved contract being discussed months ago.

Personally, I'm at the stage now where I'm a bit worried City WON'T offer £25-£30m because I think selling Milner and re-investing in two or three to-class players might be the best way forward. I don't think that signifies a lack of ambition.

[Concrete John]

1.  Offering him a contract doesn't mean he'll sign it.  If Man City bid when they did he'd have known about their interest for a while before that through his agent.
2.  Only in your world is understanding that should the price get to a ridiculous level and the player wants to go then it is the best interests of the club translated to 'willing to get rid of our best player'.
3.  Are you related to gregnash?

are you related to MON ?

I have a large Irish family, so it's a distinct possibility.

[Mazrim]

So whats the issue here? Just to ward off the spectre of Man City and their apparently limitless resources we should offer our players new contracts half way through existing ones? Doesn't sound like a very successful model to run a club to me. Very expensive.

However, I'm sure the club will offer him what we can and what he's worth (and a bit more besides perhaps). I dont see the relevance of when he's offered it. Before, after the World Cup. So what? That's between the club and Milner and if Man City have been in touch with him they should be prosecuted.
If he wants out and doesnt sign a new contract offered to him, that's his choice. When, how or if he leaves is Villa's choice at the moment.

And though I'd rather keep him, if the offer is too good to refuse, we probably shouldn't. If its isnt too good to refuse, we will refuse it. We have.
The only important factor to me is that Villa come out of this better off or else why bother?

[adrenachrome]

Uhm, we turned down the £20m Man City offered and haven't been hawking him round looking to sell.

no from the "sources" its a done deal, he's appearing on no promotional material and everyone is very very quiet about what is happening. no one else can afford the "price" on his head except the richboys of the bluecamp. A big "hes not for sale" would stop all of this.

That's an interesting point.

I remember posting a piece from the Indy at the very start of all this which stated that Citeh fully expected to get Milner, and were quite happy to wait right to the end of the transfer window.  So, they get their man and fuck us up in the process.

If the reports are correct, we said that their initial offer was below the 30 million valuation, rather than saying not at any price.  If we had said the latter, would that have been the end of the matter?

[MoetVillan]

I think if we had said the latter, we would be in exactly the same position today.  One thing is certain, every player has a price, regardless of how many "Hands off, not for sale" lines you run out.  If Chelski really offer 50 million for Torres, I think he would go.  And Spurs saying "Not for sale" is the same as a Manager getting a vote of confidence, they are on their way...

[john e]

Uhm, we turned down the £20m Man City offered and haven't been hawking him round looking to sell.

no from the "sources" its a done deal, he's appearing on no promotional material and everyone is very very quiet about what is happening. no one else can afford the "price" on his head except the richboys of the bluecamp. A big "hes not for sale" would stop all of this.

That's an interesting point.

I remember posting a piece from the Indy at the very start of all this which stated that Citeh fully expected to get Milner, and were quite happy to wait right to the end of the transfer window.  So, they get their man and fuck us up in the process.

If the reports are correct, we said that their initial offer was below the 30 million valuation, rather than saying not at any price.  If we had said the latter, would that have been the end of the matter?

it wouldnt have been the end of the matter though would it, it never is


 theres countless times clubs have said 'not for sale' only to sell when the player throws a mardy, or a offer to big to refuse comes in,
 in fact this is how it goes nine times out of ten with most transfers

[Rancid custard]

My thoughts:

That there is a clear difference between being a 'selling club' - which to my mind is actively deploying a policy of developing players and then selling them at a higher price, before replacing them with cheaper versions, developing them and getting into the same cycle - and accepting a hugely inflated fee for a player. No other club in the world would pay £20m for James Milner at this time, let alone contemplate £25m plus.

If you start re-negotiating contracts with more than half the current term to go, you've got to expect half the first team squad to start knocking on the manager's door, demanding the same. Milner's a good player who had a good season but I don't think he did enough to warrant a hugely improved contract being discussed months ago.

Personally, I'm at the stage now where I'm a bit worried City WON'T offer £25-£30m because I think selling Milner and re-investing in two or three to-class players might be the best way forward. I don't think that signifies a lack of ambition.

I agree Merv, It's not quite the same, because of the budget difference, and to be frank, he's had a better success rate but Arsenal are a selling club, They brought big with the Wiltords and the Reyes' but they got the likes of Anelka, Viera, Overmars, Hleb etc. on the cheap, served their purpose then turned huge profits on them before building the next generation. He's good a huge scouting network with a brilliant success rate which is making Arse a sustainable business in the long run, more clubs should be taking their cues from Le Professor. The team of today will be completely different in 4/5 years time.

[Dubrum]

I hope he stays as he was bleedin world class last season and if he goes to city he won't working with such a good manager as martin.

[TheSandman]

Yes just a manager who has won three serie A titles and 4 Coppa Italias.